replacing _some_ removed news.* groups (was: Re: Arrogance -- news.gr
David Stodolsky
In article <3t43c8$7...@nntp.Stanford.EDU> (news.admin.policy,alt.politics.reform,
news.groups), r...@Radon.Stanford.EDU (Russ Allbery) writes:
>In news.groups, Kai Henningsen <k...@khms.westfalen.de> writes:
> >I'd be more interested in *.future, only on a less clueless-newbie-
> >offtopic-post-magnet name. Anyone working on it? Anyone a good idea for a
> >name?
>
> I think we should probably propose news.admin.policy and future together.
> Anyone who wants to join in and provide input on charters and the like is
> certainly welcome, and I may not even be the first person in line with a
> proposal (I haven't heard back from group-advice yet). As for a name, what
> about news.development? news.planning? Hurm.
Ever since the comp.unix.wizards fiasco, its been obvious that changing
names does not solve "clueless-newbie-offtopic-post-magnet name" problems.
News.future has over 60,000 readers and its going to continue, so
it might as well be made 'official'.
At this point, the well know advantages :-)
of having guidelines instead of rules
should be used, and neither futures or policy should
be removed.
Its time for the broken new group system to be fixed.
Ignoring its outputs on this vote might finally cause the guilty :-)
to see the light.
dss
David S. Stodolsky Euromath Center University of Copenhagen
da...@euromath.dk Tel.: +45 38 33 03 30 Fax: +45 38 33 88 80 (C)
Peter da Silva
David Stodolsky <da...@arch.ping.dk> wrote:
>Ever since the comp.unix.wizards fiasco, its been obvious that changing
>names does not solve "clueless-newbie-offtopic-post-magnet name" problems.
Which particular comp.unix.wizards fiasco is this, your honor? It didn't
have its newbie-magnet name changed, so I'm at somewhat at a loss to tell
what you're getting at here.
The continuing failure of anything *but* a name change to fix comp.windows.news
demonstrates that, above all, the name is the only important predictor of
newsgroup content.
>At this point, the well know advantages :-)
>of having guidelines instead of rules
You mean "the guidelines are there to satify news admins"? Who do you think
the voters on this particular poll are? Are they suddenly going to turn
around and change their minds?
>Its time for the broken new group system to be fixed.
How? Submit it to Judges-L?